2A proponents misrepresent issues - Colorado Community Media

I have been a Littleton citizen for 35 years and am opposed to
this November’s Littleton Ballot Issue 2A. Those in favor of 2A use
a classic political approach by imagining negative consequences to
the health and welfare of the City if 2A is not approved, citing
the potential loss of revenues and services to the city. This
argument, in my opinion, misrepresents the situation.

By By:

I believe the law says that if the city collects revenues in
excess of the TABOR cap, it must ask the voters to approve the
expenditure of the excess funds. Only if the citizens voted against
the use of the excess revenue would the city be denied the use of
that revenue and be required to refund the excess to the citizens.
If critical city services or programs were in jeopardy by
circumstance or poor planning, all the council has to do is ask the
voters to use the excess and make a good case for its use. Since
1992, Littleton voters have approved

the use of TABOR excess funds four out of four times,
demonstrating that the current system works. If it ain’t broke,
don’t fix it!

Why do a majority of the City Council members (5/7) favor the
removal of our right to vote on excess revenues? They seem to want
a blank check to use all revenues collected in the future and don’t
want the inconvenience of going to the voters (as TABOR requires)
to ask permission to use excess TABOR funds. I believe this vote
provides the citizens of Littleton with a mechanism to curb the
natural appetite of any government to grow as much as possible, and
is worth the small inconvenience it may cause our city staff and
council.

Voting no on 2A will retain our right to vote on how TABOR
excess revenues will be spent, a right we have had since 1992, and
a yes vote will forever eliminate that right.

I will vote NO on 2A.

Matt Grogan

Littleton